With only two tiny mentions in one place, one of which has been declared fraudulent, the other incapable of being independently corroborated thus raising issues of a second fraud, the greater the search for an historical Jesus the more vague, ambiguous and uncertain the character becomes. If he were an historical figure, it would be the other way around.
I think there have been numerous studies and arguments about the true existence of historical Jesus. It's amazing that one single person's verbal teachings and sayings, even without any writings, can change the whole world and human history in almost all aspects of our daily living including calendar, education, laws, cultures, civilisation, management/military organisation system, etc, etc. " With reference to the Western concept of courage, the "theologian of culture" Paul Tillich (1886-1965) once wrote that Stoicism is "the only real alternative to Christianity in the Western world." https://www3.dbu.edu/naugle/pdf/stoic_christian_views.pdf Stoicism was a much more rational, believable and acceptable system than Judaism before the start of Christianity. But people cannot use Stoicism, without any superstitions, as a religion to make profits! It's possible that the authority of the time really and seriously wanted to produce the Christianity system to replace/suppress Stoicism for better/easier management of the people. Both Judaism and Stoicism seemed/appeared to accept the existence and development of Christianity during the very early stage of Christianity without much written arguments. It also seemed many believers of Jesus were persecuted during very early stage of spreading words about Jesus. Therefore, the existence of historical Jesus could be highly Probably true. While removing all the superstitions. Otherwise, Christianity cannot be flourishing without the most critical criticisms recorded from both the Judaism and Stoicism believers/scholars. Especially from Judaism. Even Judaism traditionally accepts Jesus being a prophet! Just my 20 cents!
Here is another proof, I guess. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoicism Seneca was the famous stoic philosopher and advisor to emperor Nero during the years of very early Christianity. Stoic together with Epicurean philosophers were mentioned in the Acts 17:18 for their curiosity about hearing the gospel of resurrection. Galen, the personal physician of Marcus Aurelius - a Roman Emperor and a great Stoic, considered Christianity nothing more than a "third rate" philosophy. ( Can be found by searching ' stoicism early Christianity third rate philosophy ') Gospel of Marry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mary was considered having certain influence and commonality by Stoic philosophy. (Can be found by searching ' gospel of Mary and Stoic ') None of the Stoics above rejected the historical Jesus and his followers. If they want to, according to their status they shouldn't have any fear to say something truly bad about Jesus. But they didn't, apparently. 2 more cents!
Numerous studies indeed, none of which have been able to establish Bible Jesus as historical and distinct from fiction or legend. Neither is it unique. The phenomena of single fictional concepts shaping civilizations is by no means singular to the Jesus of the Bible stories. Also Shakespeare is 'amazing' too and so many more of his sayings remain in all aspects of daily living. Things like laws, cultures, civilization, etc., may well be influenced in part, but they happen despite such things not because of them.
Perhaps an analysis can be done by forming a matrix using: A1. Jesus reality. A2. Jesus fiction. B1. Lasting impact. B2. Temporary impact. Then it could be safe to say that the impact generated due to the figure Jesus has been great, unique, meaningful, useful, and long lasting. Disregarding whether the figure Jesus was a reality or a fiction, as this aspect should be not as critical/significant. imo Say: If we suddenly found a several thousands years old manuscript specifying all details about the same maths proof and identical theory of general relativity just as Einstein delivered, then the importance/significance is still on the correctness and usefulness of the theory and maths proof. Whether the name/figure/character and existence of the truthful originator, Einstein or else, for the maths proof and theory should be not as important nor significant. That's what I would think! All the magical events and superstitions in many religious books need to be removed first for the above analysis. My 2 cents!
Not the ones whose existences, unlike Bible Jesus, are historically validated by primary, secondary and tertiary sources.
....as well as devastating, warring ,violent, extreme and also the cause of much misery. Bottom line I think, if you have religious good and you take away religious, you still have the good.
That's true. Controversy! I see that Jesus should be well trained/learned in both Buddhism (e.g. using mainly parables in teaching/preaching) and Stoicism (e.g. everyone/everything is equally part of the universe/God). My guess is Jesus and his followers originally didn't have the ability or finance to organise themselves becoming a powerful religious organisation. Not only because the followers were mainly poor and lower class people, but also they had to hide behind door in order to avoid/escape being asked whether a believer of Jesus for a deadly fear of imprisoning and persecution. They were well-known martyrs, however getting more and more popular in numbers. Therefore the authority created an organised religion with big buildings, trained staff/clerics and paid army backed by the authority, becoming nowadays Catholicism/Christianity, for better controlling of the believers by the authority. Was Jesus the one to blame? I don't know!